Just playing devil's advocate here. If it makes you angry kindly go work off that frustration before posting a response. Thanks:) .

Circa 7 months ago many on this board (myself included) were all thoroughly convinced that a ban and corresponding registration period of unlisted AR/AK receivers was imminent. TWO WEEKS. Buy Buy Buy. OMG I need more lowers. I did it also and I was convinced (well, beyond reasonable doubt...even then nothing was 100%) that a ban and registration period was coming

Well, you know what happened.

I think a lot of what went on back then was wishful thinking. It's possible for a mob to delude themselves into believing certain things and I think a slight measure of that took place back in Jan. People then had all sorts of interpretations of the law and regulatory statutes that had the DOJ forced into opening a registration period. Well, they never did.

So fast forward to today. Lots of talk about how this really isn't that big a deal and can't be enforced. Talk about it forcing open a registration period. Talk about how it isn't feasible, etc.

Sounds a bit like the mindset we saw 8 months ago. I am just saying. Lots of people (me included) were wrong then with out certainties. Who's to we're not wrong again?

VeryCoolCat

08-17-2006, 11:24 AM

Thats how they are getting around the OLL registration bullcrap. Rather than create a law banning em.... they changed the law to make it ban a feature (permanent) that will not allow a registration.

Since they can't win on the rules they set down and how the law works.... they decided to go around common law and change the rules.

Its a "loophole" much like our OLL thing but they are the ones who will have to make up for it later when the laws they right make no sense that we can have it all thrown out.

tenpercentfirearms

08-17-2006, 11:29 AM

I wouldn't say people were wrong, the DOJ just changed their minds. They said they were going to list them in oral and written statements. Then when they found out we would have liked that too much, they tried something else. Many people said we couldn't do what we did and many people said they would just get confiscated. That has not happened. This isn't a black and white issue, but it follows a very gray course.

The important thing is that on November 1, 2005 if you had told me that I would own an AR15 in about a month, I would have thought you were nuts!!! If you would have told me I would end up selling hundreds of them and becoming a pretty busy online retailer of AR parts and have 8 lowers, I would have thought you were nuts. No matter what happens, we are going to be better off than we were.

The real question someone has to ask themselves is, did you really think you would get to register your gun? I was never fully convinced and that is why I always explained it with starting my sentence "in theory". Now, I can totally live without the list. Again, I am a happy camper as a result of all of this and I am glad it happened.

blkA4alb

08-17-2006, 11:30 AM

Thats how they are getting around the OLL registration bullcrap. Rather than create a law banning em.... they changed the law to make it ban a feature (permanent) that will not allow a registration.

Since they can't win on the rules they set down and how the law works.... they decided to go around common law and change the rules.

Its a "loophole" much like our OLL thing but they are the ones who will have to make up for it later when the laws they right make no sense that we can have it all thrown out.
You just said it yourself, they changed the law. And when they change that law they hope to make my fixed magazine rifle illegal=registration.

This is in no way over and will probably involve a lawsuit.

blkA4alb

08-17-2006, 11:32 AM

I wouldn't say people were wrong, the DOJ just changed their minds. They said they were going to list them in oral and written statements. Then when they found out we would have liked that too much, they tried something else. Many people said we couldn't do what we did and many people said they would just get confiscated. That has not happened. This isn't a black and white issue, but it follows a very gray course.

The important thing is that on November 1, 2005 if you had told me that I would own an AR15 in about a month, I would have thought you were nuts!!! If you would have told me I would end up selling hundreds of them and becoming a pretty busy online retailer of AR parts and have 8 lowers, I would have thought you were nuts. No matter what happens, we are going to be better off than we were.

The real question someone has to ask themselves is, did you really think you would get to register your gun? I was never fully convinced and that is why I always explained it with starting my sentence "in theory". Now, I can totally live without the list. Again, I am a happy camper as a result of all of this and I am glad it happened.
Exactily, this is not a black and white situation. I was in the same boat, if you had told me that I would have an AR and 3 other receivers right now, no way! :D

The Soup Nazi

08-17-2006, 11:39 AM

JIt's possible for a mob to delude themselves into believing certain things

You mean this isn't wikipedia where we can all just agree on a lie and hope it to be true? :eek: Theres a point where if they push too hard (and this is probably it), you'll have lawsuits flying around which will probably reverse more harm than they did if done in the right way.

Jicko

08-17-2006, 11:54 AM

Circa 7 months ago many on this board (myself included) were all thoroughly convinced that a ban and corresponding registration period of unlisted AR/AK receivers was imminent. TWO WEEKS. Buy Buy Buy. OMG I need more lowers. I did it also and I was convinced (well, beyond reasonable doubt...even then nothing was 100%) that a ban and registration period was coming

You were just "naive"......... "a ban and registration period was coming" was just one of the "possibilities"....... from day 1, I(and many of us) understood that *many* things can happen.... but 1 thing I know is... that I can NOW build an AR15(maybe not 100% an AR15), that I can never before!

I think a lot of what went on back then was wishful thinking. It's possible for a mob to delude themselves into believing certain things and I think a slight measure of that took place back in Jan. People then had all sorts of interpretations of the law and regulatory statutes that had the DOJ forced into opening a registration period. Well, they never did.

I even recalled people posting saying that IF all you want is the ban to come, and if it never come, you do not want one of these OLLs, then it is better off for the person to NOT get into this... since there is a chance that a ban will never come.

So fast forward to today. Lots of talk about how this really isn't that big a deal and can't be enforced. Talk about it forcing open a registration period. Talk about how it isn't feasible, etc.

Sounds a bit like the mindset we saw 8 months ago. I am just saying.
Lots of people (me included) were wrong then with out certainties. Who's to we're not wrong again?

Wrong or right... or whatever.... what I know is that, I now own multiple CA-ARs with detachable magazines and "pistol-gripless"(and non-evil).... and they are FUN to shoot.... :D

Glasshat

08-17-2006, 4:43 PM

The DOJ has not changed their position one bit since this started in December. Their mission was then, is now and forever shall be as stated in the original AW ban: eliminate assault weapons in California.

Nothing they have done since the original ban has altered their mission; only their tactics have changed. They never intended to "list" and they never intend to take any of our pro-2A opinions into account.

Enjoy shooting your OLL for now. The DOJ will not stop until all guns they don't like are redefined into AW's and permanently banned.

Mesa Tactical

08-17-2006, 5:01 PM

I wouldn't say people were wrong, the DOJ just changed their minds.

The exploitation of the OLL "loophole" made it clear to the DoJ that the law as written (and underlined by Harrot) is ridiculous and impossible to enforce, that's all.

Once the OLL business got underway, the notion that the DoJ would list OLLs and keep on listing new models as they appeared never made any sense. So, yeah, it was nothing more than wishful thinking on the part of Calgunners.

anotherone

08-17-2006, 5:16 PM

The bottom line is that we all took a calculated risk. We had no idea what would happen and when we started importing lowers we all accepted this risk. Personally, I just wanted to build a California legal fixed magazine AR-15 that I could enjoy without worrying about magazine jam problems (a welded/glued magazine will eventually fail and cannot be disassembled for repair/cleaning). As an added bonus I got to drop the mag while I was in Nevada and Arizona. Talk about the coolest thing to happen since 1999 and because unlike other "blue states" like NY there's no fed ban extension in California I get to have all the evil features my heart could ever want.

People started talking about registration, the DOJ put up a notice for registration. Maybe the NRA thwarted our plans by putting a lot of effort into halting the DOJ's "Category 4" scheme... personally I think that just like us the NRA and other pro-gun elements also decided to take a chance. They decided to take a chance at finally bringing down SB-23. And if you've been reading what's starting to happen now, we're planning a counter-attack with detachable magazine SKS rifles :)!

This thing is FAR from over and in a lot of ways reminds me of the 2000 Presidential election. I never had any doubt in my mind from day 1 that this whole thing would end up being decided in a court room. Relax, enjoy your Cali-legal rifles and be proud to be taking part in what is likely the most significant grass roots pro-2nd amendment activity to ever take place in this state.

WeThePeople

08-17-2006, 6:39 PM

Please remember that some people voiced doubts about the prevailing paradigm (which was that the DoJ will list as fast as possible), even back in December/January. Some of those people pretty accurately predicted what the DoJ was going to do. We ran the most vocal exponent of that contrarian view out of town, because we prefer to inhale our own exhaust. When I say "we" here, I refer to the mob of Calguns members, not to all of them.

I think there is an extremely important cautionary tale in there. I fear that few people even understand that cautionary tale, much less have learned from it.

Don't worry. If you're talking about me, the tar and feathers came off me after a few weeks.

I can't seem to find my thread entitled "bweise, please reconsider". In that thread, I suggested that he not try to force an early registration via the press. Patience would allow many other people to buy OLLs. Also, too much visibility would force Sacramento to find a way to pass a law banning OLLs. Of course, I was dismissed as a shill.

Whatever!

dawson8r

08-17-2006, 11:11 PM

I generally share the opinion of 10% an others. Between Jan-Apr of 2006 I bought 6 lowers. I bought them in California. I DROSed them. They are mine.

I have built 2 with Prince50 kits because I am a law abiding citizen and wanted to keep them in a legal configuration. I have shot them numerous times and thoroughly enjoy them. I have no regrets. I sent in a letter with my objections to the proposed changes. If the DOJ does nothing at all I will continue to enjoy them in their fixed magazine configuration.

My brother just bought a house in Phoenix and will be relocating early next year. When I visit him I will bring my rifles and will back the set screw out with a tool so that I can shoot it with detachable magazines. This is exactly why I was attracted to the OLL opportunity. To have an AR-type rifle that was configured to be legal in California but could be configured to accept detachable magazines should I choose to relocate or travel out of state.